UAX09 wrote: Why should the children of wealthy black/Hispanic politicians receive AA benefits over other minorities? .......... I think all Asians/whites have a right to complain, until the trend reverses with a SCOTUS decision on AA.

The argument that poor whites/Asians deserve AA (or that no one deserves AA) has been made ad nauseam. Keep it to yourself.

On the other hand, an African American or Hispanic student living in a 5 million dollar home who could afford to take Powerscore prep gets AA benefits over a poor Asian/white guy.

Sounds like whining/complaining to me. It's beating a dead horse...in the URM forum of all places.

BlaqBella wrote:

bosmer88 wrote:Not what again?

This train of thought:

On the other hand, an African American or Hispanic student living in a 5 million dollar home who could afford to take Powerscore prep gets AA benefits over a poor Asian/white guy.

Sounds like whining/complaining to me. It's beating a dead horse...in the URM forum of all places.

Perhaps, it's considered whining to some people, but if you are an Asian refugee from a poor Asian nation you might wonder why privileged blacks and Hispanics get AA benefits over you. Why should the children of wealthy black/Hispanic politicians receive AA benefits over other minorities? If you want to exclude Chinese/Indians from receiving AA benefits because they are overrepresented, that's fine with me. With regard to op's comment, all Asians are included under the golf umbrella of "Asian" without regard to the geopolitical/economic realities of Asia. I think all Asians/whites have a right to complain, until the trend reverses with a SCOTUS decision on AA.

I just want to point out here that what you're really talking about is socioeconomic status, not race (though of course the two are interrelated in very real and intimate ways). But your argument cuts both ways: there are also rich Asians, and why should they benefit at the expense of poor Hispanics and blacks? I think the issue is that greater attention should be payed to SES instead of ethnicity and race, because at the end of the day how can you really argue that any single Asian law student deserves it more or less than people of other skin colors?

acrossthelake wrote:Law school is where Asians who are bad at math go. You need the prestige to offset the extent to which you have shamed your cultural heritage.

So what, the ones who got an A- in Quantum Physics go to law school instead of med school?

the funny thing is this is actually kind of true. i consider myself terrible at math and haven't taken a math class since my junior year of HS (didn't have to in college w/ AP credit). the thing is though that was calc II lol so i guess it's still better than a lot of people.

acrossthelake wrote:Law school is where Asians who are bad at math go. You need the prestige to offset the extent to which you have shamed your cultural heritage.

So what, the ones who got an A- in Quantum Physics go to law school instead of med school?

the funny thing is this is actually kind of true. i consider myself terrible at math and haven't taken a math class since my junior year of HS (didn't have to in college w/ AP credit). the thing is though that was calc II lol so i guess it's still better than a lot of people.

Ditto- I consider myself "bad at math" despite stuff like getting a 800 on the math SAT section. I'm also a failed premed.

Also the affirmativr actionn discussion in this thread needs to stop or bans will ensue.

acrossthelake wrote:Law school is where Asians who are bad at math go. You need the prestige to offset the extent to which you have shamed your cultural heritage.

So what, the ones who got an A- in Quantum Physics go to law school instead of med school?

the funny thing is this is actually kind of true. i consider myself terrible at math and haven't taken a math class since my junior year of HS (didn't have to in college w/ AP credit). the thing is though that was calc II lol so i guess it's still better than a lot of people.

Ditto- I consider myself "bad at math" despite stuff like getting a 800 on the math SAT section. I'm also a failed premed.

Also the affirmativr actionn discussion in this thread needs to stop or bans will ensue.

Nice high school humble brag...I was always pretty good at math, I just was never a fan of it because I always had to study more for that class while in pretty much everything else I could just pay attention to glass discussion and go from there.

As for the tipping...I say 20% minimum. Though I dated 2 waitresses so I may be biased. My theory is to over tip, especially with bar tenders. First off it's good karma. Second, especially with bar tenders, it comes back to you quickly.

On the other hand, an African American or Hispanic student living in a 5 million dollar home who could afford to take Powerscore prep gets AA benefits over a poor Asian/white guy.

Sounds like whining/complaining to me. It's beating a dead horse...in the URM forum of all places.

BlaqBella wrote:

bosmer88 wrote:Not what again?

This train of thought:

On the other hand, an African American or Hispanic student living in a 5 million dollar home who could afford to take Powerscore prep gets AA benefits over a poor Asian/white guy.

Sounds like whining/complaining to me. It's beating a dead horse...in the URM forum of all places.

Perhaps, it's considered whining to some people, but if you are an Asian refugee from a poor Asian nation you might wonder why privileged blacks and Hispanics get AA benefits over you. Why should the children of wealthy black/Hispanic politicians receive AA benefits over other minorities? If you want to exclude Chinese/Indians from receiving AA benefits because they are overrepresented, that's fine with me. With regard to op's comment, all Asians are included under the golf umbrella of "Asian" without regard to the geopolitical/economic realities of Asia. I think all Asians/whites have a right to complain, until the trend reverses with a SCOTUS decision on AA.

Forgive me, didn't read the whole thread. No talking about AA in the urm forum? hurp. And my brother below me needs to do some breathing exercises or something.

Last edited by tino1317 on Fri Feb 08, 2013 3:21 pm, edited 2 times in total.

tino1317 wrote:Isn't the whole point of AA to promote diversity? There are more white people living in poverty in this country than black or latino. It seems like a system based on socioeconomic status would do nothing in regards to the goal of affirmative action. Maybe I am mistaken but I have always understood affirmative action as an effort to get more blacks, latinos, natives, etc in positions where they are underrepresented. Including both public and private institutions. I think people mistake the goal as trying to help only poor people from these races when the goal is to simply get them represented, regardless of socioeconomic status. The fact that these races have lower socioeconomic status on average is clearly a factor that has played a part in their under-representation, but not the main factor that led to the idea of AA. At least that's my understanding.

If it was based on socioeconomic status wouldn't that actually hurt ethnic diversity in institutions because of how many more white people are low SES than minorities on a strictly numbers basis? Obviously if you look at the percentages the minorities have higher low SES percentages than whites, but there are still more whites overall living with low SES. Sorry for rambling.

Some people just don't fucking listen. THIS ISN'T VIETNAM!! THERE ARE RULES!

acrossthelake wrote:Also the affirmativr actionn discussion in this thread needs to stop or bans will ensue.

tino1317 wrote:Isn't the whole point of AA to promote diversity? There are more white people living in poverty in this country than black or latino. It seems like a system based on socioeconomic status would do nothing in regards to the goal of affirmative action. Maybe I am mistaken but I have always understood affirmative action as an effort to get more blacks, latinos, natives, etc in positions where they are underrepresented. Including both public and private institutions. I think people mistake the goal as trying to help only poor people from these races when the goal is to simply get them represented, regardless of socioeconomic status. The fact that these races have lower socioeconomic status on average is clearly a factor that has played a part in their under-representation, but not the main factor that led to the idea of AA. At least that's my understanding.

If it was based on socioeconomic status wouldn't that actually hurt ethnic diversity in institutions because of how many more white people are low SES than minorities on a strictly numbers basis? Obviously if you look at the percentages the minorities have higher low SES percentages than whites, but there are still more whites overall living with low SES. Sorry for rambling.

This is an excellent point, and I think is the correct interpretation of affirmative action. Schools also look for socioeconomic diversity as well, but just because you don't fit into BOTH categories of URM and SES shouldn't preclude you from the benefits of AA per se.